Low Inertia

[David C. Stanwood]

Stéphane,  (and Jim, see below)

The feeling of resistance from inertia certainly 
contributes to a feeling of control (or lack of 
it depending on the evenness of it).  However 
friction can also help give a feeling of control 
by giving a feeling of viscosity and connection. 
If you look historically back even just a few 
decades the emphasis on having a specific amount 
of friction was more prevalent as apposed to the 
more recent movement towards "less friction is 
better".  In older instruments (100yrs+), with 
lighter hammers, friction may have played more of 
a role in giving the pianist a feeling of 
connection on the way down through the stroke.

Erard pianos used to have adjustable friction 
hammer flanges.  The older Steinway touch weight 
specs had not just down weight but down weight 
and up weight specifications thereby specifying 
friction.  The modern day specs de-specify up 
weight and let it be anything above 18g with 
emphasis on less being better.  Bill Garlick who 
ran the North Bennet St. School learned piano 
technology at the London Furniture school (early 
70's?). He told us that when repinning hammer 
shanks they were graded by the swing method. 
Anything over three sings and they flunked the 
test.

I can give an anecdotal piece of evidence as 
well.  In 1988 I showed an experimental action to 
Rudolph Serkin.  It was a Steinway D with very 
light, extremely cut down, soft, cold pressed 
hammers with adjustable friction hammer flanges 
each set to precisely 5g rotational friction 
measured at a 32mm radius.

His comments:

"It feels connected somehow. I couldn't believe it at first."
"It's amazing. The feeling is so immediate."

but although the sound of this piano was sweet, 
it was too small for the concert stage, hence the 
move towards heavier hammers of the modern age.

Something to think about!

David Stanwood

(Hammer Weight Standards available at: 
http://www.stanwoodpiano.com/SW-HWstandards4.pdf)

<snip>
>I do believe that with more inertia in the action, your finger gets from the
>action "resistance" a useful information about how hard it has actually
>begun to strike the key, and you have the full 10 mm dip to adapt your
>finger action to what your musical mind intended.  This goes intuitively, of
>course.  But more inertia in the action is a 
>remedy against unwanted out of >range dynamics.
<snip>

Jim,

I agree with you..  I think Chopin would be a 
little shocked if he came back to life and tried 
playing todays pianos.

When matching hammer weight and ratio we are 
certainly guided by empirical evidence.  It would 
be nice to have a sensor on the end of our finger 
attached to a device which told us how much force 
we exert when playing the keys!

Thanks,

David

>Thanks for your response.

>As I mentioned, my complaint is an empirical 
>one. I do feel that, at least in my
>experience, that many action designers and pianists,  choose, as a default, a
>heavier dynamic touch than I would like to see. Sometimes both the sound and
>touch of these instruments seem to target only one monolithic flavor. The
>purpose of my post is to raise the possibility of other takes on the issue.

>Thanks again.

>Jim